During the Emergency only three newspapers put up a semblance of resistance

During the Emergency only three newspapers put up a semblance of resistance

The period of Emergency has seen rigid censorship. Small anti-establishment newspapers at the district level had been closed down by the District Magistrates and were replaced by "government gazettes brought out by sycophants". Very few newspaper chains had the guts to resist since most of the owners had huge stakes in industry. Only three newspapers put up a semblance of resistance.

advertisement

india today digital

April 22, 2015

ISSUE DATE: April 15, 1977

UPDATED: April 28, 2015 16:26 IST

At the Press Club of India in New Delhi the tickers brought the results as an unprecedented crowd of congenitally free loading newsmen tried to vie with each other in buying drinks. "We are back in business," they told each other as they gulped whatever came their way. "The medium gets a massage," one journalist remarked.

The period of Emergency has seen rigid censorship. Small anti-establishment newspapers at the district level had been closed down by the District Magistrates and were replaced by "government gazettes brought out by sycophants". At the national level using the lever of "jute baron ownership" the government had successfully cajoled and threatened the major newspaper chains to accept a policy of "being the written version of TV and AIR". Very few newspaper chains had the guts to resist since most of the owners had huge stakes in industry. Only three newspapers put up a semblance of resistance. The leader was the Indian Express owned by the ebullient R.N. Goenka who continued printing whatever news was permitted under the law; taking in his stride the total ban on government advertisement and fighting in the court of law, sudden "electricity failures" and "attachments due to non-payment of various bills". Goenka simultaneously faced earlier cases of alleged attempts to manipulate with the provisions of the company law.

The Statesman, a private limited company, followed the Indian Express. Its overpowering Managing Director, C.R. Irani, and Chairman of the board, N.A. Palkhiwala, the famous lawyer, both on the board of trustees of the paper, kept the paper within the law but saw that it took as much advantage as possible.

It is the Indian Express and The Statesman which first carried stories of demolition of jhuggis and jhonpris and "resettlement of slum dwellers".

The Statesman had its government advertisement suspended and it was only after the elections that the ban was removed. Surprisingly the pro-CPI newspaper Patriot took a stand. Undaunted by threats and faced with economic ruin it single handedly refused to run any news of Sanjay Gandhi. The dour editorial board Chairman Edatata Narayanan is reported to have remarked: "Who is Sanjay Gandhi? I neither recognize nor accept the fact that he is a leader. I have opposed the Jana Sangh but run their stories. This fellow (Sanjay Gandhi) has only a base of hoodlums, his place is in the police bulletin."

The conduct of most other papers were in a "more loyal than the king" stand. Editorial instructions in the Birla-owned The Hindustan Times, the Sahu-Jain owned Times of India, as well as Bengal's Ananda Bazaar Patrika (the largest circulated newspaper in the country) ensured that only "massive crowds" gave a tumultuous welcome to Sanjay Gandhi". Special articles were commissioned on "the Sanjay I knew". The worst examples were Blitz, the crypto left-wing weekly, the Illustrated Weekly whose breasts, bottoms and bonhomie had boosted its circulation and no adjective was spared to describe the "new phenomenon, the hopes of the masses" and the "natural leader".

When Mrs Gandhi called for the elections nothing initially changed. Items on Mrs Gandhi and Sanjay Gandhi remained a "must for page one". The release of the Opposition leaders, the "relaxation of censorship" and the news of the formation the Janata party left most of the major chains unmoved. While editors asked "what is happening" they diligently removed every single mention or adjective in praise of the Opposition. In The Hindustan Times and the Times of India the newsdesk was informed that all Opposition leaders must be scrupulously underplayed. The general reading was that the former Prime Minister, like the immortal Rider Haggard's Ayesha would always run the government. It is only the papers who had opposed the government who stepped up the campaign.

Simultaneously the pro-government newspaper chains with their policy of "support Congress - they are bound to win" saw alarming drops in their circulation and corresponding increases in the anti-government ones. The Hindustan Times and the Times of India reported a "real drop in circulation" (actual drop plus decrease in normal increase) of 25,000 to 40,000 within two weeks while the Indian Express and The Statesman were trying to cope a tripling of circulation and demands for more and more copies.

The turning point came with Jagjivan Ram's and his colleagues' resignation from the Congress. For the first few days the major newspapers played it down wishing it would go away. Election reports from the constituencies by the papers own correspondents were watered down. The circulation went down further. It is only after gauging the popular mood that the newspaper barons started publication of fair reportage on the Opposition. The Hindustan Times was an example in point. It is reported that the figurehead of the largest industrial empire in India, G.D. Birla who also owns the paper, warned his son K.K. Birla chairman of The Hindustan Times to be careful and not put "all the eggs in one basket". Advice from other senior members of the Birla family also went unheeded and K.K. Birla remained an ardent admirer of Sanjay Gandhi till the bitter end.

The resignation of Congress stalwarts, the formation of the CFD and the decision by the Congress High Command to ditch the Youth Congress which was to be given over 50 per cent of the seats saw a change in the mood of the papers. From a policy of deleting any unsavoury reference to Mrs Gandhi and the extra constitutional authority (an euphemism for Sanjay) the orders to "report the Opposition fairly" went out to the correspondents with the tider that till election day the position is that the "Opposition is here but it still is Sanjay and Indira".

The procrastination of the Press barons was such that a despatch by one of senior-most political correspondents of The Hindustan Times datelined "Patna to Lucknow" predicting a total rout of the Congress party was spiked. A telegram on the prospects in Rae Bareli and Amethi (from which Mrs Gandhi and Sanjay were contesting) from the correspondent which said: "do not be surpised if both lose," was dismissed as a joke.

While the anti-establishment papers went the whole hog the major chains kept to their policy. The real change started when the results started coming in. Initially with a 20 to 30 seat variation the barons were still hopeful that the Congress might pull through. As angry crowds waited outside the spot news board the orders for delaying the news that both the "national leaders were trailing" were sent out.

Then came the change. As the defeat became a certainty the papers which had seen "unequalled development and people's support" for the Congress party overnight gave maximum display to the Congress defeat. The Hindustan Times used its poster type, never used for the newspaper, to announce Mrs Gandhi's defeat. The Times of India ran an eight column headline. Ironically enough it was the Indian Express which toned down the news. The volte face was complete. The Opposition (now the ruling party) got an average of 70 per cent of the space against the previous ratio of 20:80. Every single establishment paper insisted on verbatim reports of all gatherings. All leave was cancelled and half a dozen reporters were assigned for every Press conference given by the previous "untouchables".

With the Janata and CFD committed to a free press the press barons were worried that they might lose control. They started their lobbying in an effort to stall any attempt to form public trusts to run the newspapers. Whether they succeed has yet to be seen. Meanwhile at the Press Club everybody says "Cheers". Only a few ask: For what and for whom?